Faller v. U.S. Dep't of Justice

• Decision Date: 17 September 2021
• Docket Number: Civil Action 20-1597 (ABJ)
• Parties: REV. JAMES S. FALLER, II and GARY S. VANDER BOEGH, Plaintiffs, v. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, et. al., Defendants.
• Court: U.S. District Court — District of Columbia

REV. JAMES S. FALLER, II and GARY S. VANDER BOEGH, Plaintiffs, v. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, et. al., Defendants.

Civil Action No. 20-1597 (ABJ)

United States District Court, District of Columbia

September 17, 2021

MEMORANDUM OPINION

AMY BERMAN JACKSON, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

On June 12, 2020, pro se plaintiffs Rev. James S. Faller, II (“Faller”) and Gary S. Vander Boegh (“Vander Boegh”)^[1] filed this action against the U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”), U.S Department of Labor (“DOL”), U.S. Department of Energy (“DOE”), Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”), and Nuclear Regulatory Commission (collectively, “Federal Defendants”), the Commonwealth of Kentucky (“Kentucky”), and “Unk[n]own Actors.” Compl. [Dkt. # 1]. Plaintiffs argue that defendants conspired to deprive them of their “constitutionally guaranteed civil rights, freedoms and properties” in violation of 42 U.S.C. §§ 1981, 1983, and 1985; 18 U.S.C. §§ 241, 242, and 1581(a-b); and the First, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, and Eighth Amendments.^[2] Compl. at 17-24. They seek various forms of relief, including declaratory judgments, permanent injunctions, and compensatory and punitive damages. Compl. at 21-24. Faller claims defendants have caused him a “direct loss of more than $1.8 [b]illion [d]ollars ” Compl. at 6, but there is no quantification of Vander Boegh's alleged damages.

The Federal Defendants and Kentucky have filed separate motions to dismiss all claims in the complaint pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6). Defs.' Mot. to Dismiss [Dkt. # 7] at 1; Def.'s Mot. to Dismiss [Dkt. # 13] at 1. Defendants argue that the claims against them are barred by sovereign immunity, that the criminal statutes cited do not provide a private cause of action, and that none of the counts states a viable claim for relief. See Mem. of P. & A. in Supp. of Fed. Defs. Mot to Dismiss [Dkt # 7-1] (“Fed. Mot.”); Mem. of P & A. in Supp. of Kentucky's Mot. to Dismiss [Dkt # 13-1] (“KY Mot.”); see also Defs.' Reply to Opp. [Dkt. # 18] (“Fed. Reply”); Def.'s Reply to Opp. [Dkt. # 19] (“KY Reply”). Kentucky also asserts that the federal courts should abstain from consideration of the claims seeking to enjoin pending state court actions. KY Mot. at 7. Plaintiffs have opposed the motion. See Pls.' Opp. to Mot. [Dkt. # 17] (“Opp.”).

On November 19, 2020, plaintiffs filed a motion to strike the motion to dismiss, an emergency motion for a temporary restraining order, a motion for preliminary injunction, a motion for hearing, and a motion for leave to file excess pages consisting of more than 1, 700 exhibits. Pls.' Mot. to Strike [Dkt. # 9]; Pls.' Mots. for TRO, Preliminary Injunction, and Hearing [Dkt. # 10]; Pls.' Mot. to File Excess Pages [Dkt. # 11]. After denying plaintiffs' motion to strike, the Court deferred further briefing or consideration of plaintiffs' remaining motions until resolution of the pending motions to dismiss. Min. Order (Nov. 20, 2020). On April 5, 2021, plaintiffs filed another motion asking the Court to reconsider that decision. Sealed Mot. to Reconsider Emergency Mot. for a Hearing for Temporary/Permanent Restraining Order [Dkt. # 22] (SEALED). For the reasons set forth below, the Court will GRANT defendants' motions to dismiss. Because the complaint must be dismissed, plaintiffs' remaining motions will be DENIED as moot.

BACKGROUND

The preamble to the complaint explains:

The Plaintiffs have both a diverse and a common background. In the end, both Plaintiffs have been attacked, deprived of multiple civil rights and robbed of assets and life. The stated attacks, infra, are specific and intentional efforts to silence the Plaintiffs and break them from stopping the illicit activities, at times, out right criminal behavior of a multitude of actors. The complained of, illicit activities have been specifically enabled by the Defendant's singular and combined actions and intentional inactions which have forced the Plaintiff's to seek judicial remedies.

Compl at 6.

According to the complaint, plaintiff Faller is a “twenty-five year plus expert in fighting corruption, ” who has “provided services to Judges, Lawyers, Law Enforcement, and even the United States.” Compl. at 8; see also Compl. at 9 (“Faller began becoming high profile as an expert in fighting corruption and taking cases wrought with injustice, one even referred to him directly by former Attorney General Eric Holder that turned out to be a set up to attack Faller and frame him”), 14 (“Faller assists lawyers, Judges Law Enforcement, governments and clients in dealing with and fighting corruption”). He alleges that his efforts to expose wrongdoing have resulted in an unending series of “dangerous reactions”:

[H]e lost (2) two children and another was raped at four years old. Faller was falsely charged some (6) six times to silence him. Some of the events got so serious a sitting state Judge engaged in steps to have Faller assassinated. Fortunately the government arrested the state Judge on RICO charges.

In other instances, the Commonwealth of Kentucky engaged in actions to falsely charge Faller (4) four times. One (1) of those indictments still stands today from 2006.

Compl. at 8.

Plaintiff Vander Boegh is an engineer residing in West Paducah, KY, and former “licensed solid waste manager” of the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant (“Paducah Plant”) overseen by the DOE. Compl. at 6-7, 14. While working at the Paducah Plant approximately twenty years ago, Plaintiff Vander Boegh allegedly discovered “illegal acts and intentional concealment of mishandling of highly lethal materials, ” including solid-waste materials contaminated with radioactive, transuranic elements. Compl. at 6-7.

The horrific effects of the transuranics ultimately polluted rivers, streams, land (including elementary schools[), ] food crops and other places of human and animal exposure. The result of the pollution began to reveal itself in the forms of child sicknesses (including deadly cancers and deformities[), ] adults becoming sick with cancer, brain tumors and other deadly sicknesses, while animals in the region began mutating, including a deer that was seen with (2) two heads.

Compl. at 7.

The complaint alleges that the Paducah Plant exposed its employees, including plaintiff Vander Boegh, to “beryllium in sufficient quantity to cause them to contract Chronic Beryllium Disease, an irreversible, deadly medical condition that slowly kills the victim.” Compl. at 7 (emphasis in original) (footnote omitted). Plaintiff Vander Boegh alleges that he was terminated for filing a complaint related to his discoveries, and that after his “departure from the site in 2004, ” he began helping “sick nuclear workers” initiate claims for their “work related illnesses.” Compl. at 7.

The two men met at a conference in approximately 2008, where plaintiffs “discovered they were fighting the same persons” and began to work together “surreptitiously.” Compl. at 8. They joined efforts to help workers at the Paducah Plant - whom they refer to as their “clients” - obtain their “statutorily guaranteed compensation” for “exposure and or injuries relating to toxic materials being illegally and negligently mishandled by the Defendants.” Compl. at 12, 16-17.

Thereafter, according to the plaintiffs, federal and state officials conspired to “silence, and if necessary, neutralize” them. Compl. at 17. They assert that “the Department of Justice and the Commonwealth of Kentucky took specific steps to prevent Faller or Vander Boegh from having ANY protection of law enforcement.” Compl. at 8 (emphasis in original).

As the two men “pushed harder for justice, ”

The Attorney General for the State of Kentucky issued a written moratorium which ordered the entire Justice Cabinet for the Commonwealth of Kentucky to deny help of any kind to Faller or anyone on his behalf. At the same time, Commonwealth of Kentucky Officials took specific steps to interfere with Vander Boegh's ability to represent his clients and to slowly deprive him of his own personal wealth.

Compl. at 9. Meanwhile, the complaint alleges, “DOJ, DOL and DOE, working on behalf of corrupt officials, concocted methods to deny Vander Boegh his legal rights and protections of law.” Compl. at 9.

The complaint goes on:

As time continued, Faller created a way to make direct submissions to Grand Juries in Kentucky. A federal Judge stepped in and changed the law of the land in the state of Kentucky to stop Faller. This same Federal judge, later, was involved in and was complicit to abduction of a witness and willful perjury in a make believe trial against Faller.

Compl. at 9. To stop Vander Boegh, the defendants would allegedly “manipulate records, cause Vander Boegh's lawyers to secretly work against his interests and prevent him from knowing of various legal events, all designed to deprive and or remove millions of dollars of assets and benefits that Vander Boegh either owned, or was a beneficiary of.” Compl. at 10. And “[s]pecific steps were taken to continually interfere” with Faller's “substantial revenues and support, ” from sources including “members of a Royal Family in Europe.” Compl. at 10.

Plaintiffs allege that “[a]s Faller and Vander Boegh began closing in on the source and kind of the Kentucky corruption, ” Compl. at 10, federal and state officials engaged in a concerted effort to prevent plaintiffs from exposing defendants' “wrongful acts” and to deny compensation to plaintiffs' clients. Compl. at 16. They assert that “members of the Department of Justice worked with highly corrupt State of Kentucky Officials to have Faller continually indicted.” Compl. at 10. Faller was eventually convicted of tax evasion in a “kangaroo trial” in which “the Judge entered...